| name | zoo-spec-review |
| description | Review task file spec from all angles: flag omissions, fix uncontroversial problems, punt real decisions to user. Requires task file path. |
Follow .zoo/zoo.md, .zoo/planning.md, .zoo/planreview.md if exists.
Review task file against codebase and research file. Do not start impl/full workflow. Question: "Is it right?"
Check Request, Decisions, Spec, Subtasks when present:
- omissions: request/ticket gaps, implied edge cases, errors, legacy data, migrations, settings, permissions, translations, browser flows, tests
- contradictions: request/spec/decisions/subtasks disagree
- reality: spec claims contradict code; code wins
- scope extensions: user would be surprised
Act:
- Fix clear uncontroversial mistakes/omissions.
- If orchestrator keeps a flagged non-violation, require reason in
Decisions.
- Ask user for product decisions, important technical decisions, controversial/unclear technical decisions. Use AskUserQuestion if available; otherwise chat. Give concrete options, recommendation first, consequences. Record answers in
Decisions marked (USER).
- Scope extensions: ask user to choose proposal, subtask, or dismiss. Classify tiny inline, broad mundane as subtask, large/surprising as proposal.
- Decide mundane judgment calls on spot when not worth user attention.
- Log each round/outcome to
## Log.
- Loop after any update until no findings.
